0

Rethinking Legal Education in India: Addressing Challenges and Reforming the Bar Exam

Articles , , , ,

 

“Education is what makes a person fearless, teaches him the lesson of unity, makes him aware of his rights and inspires him to struggle for his rights.”

~ Babasaheb Ambedkar

ABSTRACT

Legal education plays an important role in a country like India, where the rule of law is fundamental. A sensible and practical legal education policy is required to preserve the standing and effectiveness of the legal profession, as the nature and substance of legal education have a direct impact on it. The current conversation in India about legal education is to bring the curriculum up to date and modernize it so that students and teachers find it to be humanistic and relevant to society. Legal education and the bar exam, which are overseen by the University Grants Commission (UGC) and the Bar Council of India (BCI), are crucial in developing qualified legal practitioners. However, significant issues within these institutions necessitate reform. This article explores the issues legal education faces today, analyses the deficiencies of the bar exam, and suggests changes and paths for the future of legal education in India.

INTRODUCTION

“Legal education is a science that imparts to students knowledge of specific principles and legal provisions to enable them to enter the legal profession,” states the Indian Law Commission. The main objective of legal education is to produce socially conscious lawyers. However, in the contemporary day, legal education should be viewed as both an instrument for social design and a way to produce attorneys. The foundation of every civilization is the rule of law, which also generates law-abiding individuals, solicitors, scholars, and potential judges. The training that attorneys get before to beginning their practice is referred to as legal education in India. Historical narratives state that kings and princes in antiquity received teachings about Nyaya and dharma. Then, the concept of legal representation evolved throughout the Mughal era. Legal education existed long before India earned its independence because many of our freedom fighters had backgrounds in the legal field. Still, it didn’t really take off until after independence. Legal education began to exist in modern-day India around 1885. A number of committees were established to examine and suggest changes to the legal education system. The Indian Constitution essentially established the obligation to provide legal education. The Advocates’ Act of 1961 introduced consistency to the legal system. The revised scenario calls for the addition of positions as a business advisor, policy planner, and interest group negotiator, among others. Three-year legal degrees are available at several traditional universities, however enrollment in these programmes is restricted to those who have graduated. Later, the popularity of legal education in the twenty-first century expanded with the founding of the National Law University in Bangalore and the introduction of five-year law curricula. Approximately 21 national law universities and 1200 public and private law colleges are now operating in India.

Due to globalisation, the legal system now has a lot more social responsibility, and lawyers are expected to be social engineers and change agents in the fields of development and governance. Law ought to be studied in the social content if it serves as an instrument for social engineering and control. This entails combining social and behavioural sciences with legal studies. This would allow the attorney to resolve issues in a fashion that is acceptable to society and support the growth of public. As the guardian of society’s conscience, legal education must adapt to the ever-increasing needs of society and be prepared to manage complicated situations, directing and moderating societal development. It ought to uphold the highest standards of morality, discipline, and competence while guaranteeing that everyone, regardless of social standing or level of wealth, has access to legal services. The goal of legal education is to instill in students a thorough understanding of both substantive and procedural legal rules by means of competent instruction from professionals. Its main goal is to generate competent attorneys who possess the knowledge and abilities needed to successfully navigate the complex and ever-expanding legal practice environment.

 

CURRENT CHALLENGES IN LEGAL EDUCATION

One of the most serious challenges to Indian legal education is an outdated curriculum that cannot keep up with the rapidly changing legal landscape. Many law schools continue to teach outdated subjects and materials, leaving students unprepared for today’s legal profession. Emphasising rote learning over critical thinking and problem solving further limits students’ ability to adapt to changing demands. Furthermore, infrastructure issues such as overcrowded classrooms, insufficient libraries, and limited access to technology impede the overall educational experience. Historically, Indian legal education has been primarily theoretical, with few opportunities for practical skill development. This leaves graduates unprepared for real-world legal practice, reducing their confidence and competence as lawyers.

While some schools have implemented clinical programmes and internships, they are frequently limited in scope and availability. The lack of emphasis on practical skills such as drafting, negotiation, and advocacy exacerbates the situation.  Financial constraints, geographical limitations, and insufficient support systems make it difficult for students from rural and economically disadvantaged backgrounds to obtain a quality legal education. For many people, attending reputable law schools is out of reach due to high tuition fees and the cost of living in cities. This leads to a lack of diversity in the legal profession, exacerbating social and economic inequalities. The dramatic rise in the number of law colleges has not been accompanied by careful planning and expansion. According to statistics, in 1955-56, there were 7 university law departments and 36 law colleges under 25 universities, with a total of 20159 students enrolled. However, in 1982-83, there were 302 law colleges with over 250,000 students enrolled. Unfortunately, this rapid increase was not the result of careful planning and growth. Legal education is increasingly viewed as a business rather than a scholarly endeavor, with many new colleges lacking adequate infrastructure, staffing, and resources. During this time, the Bar Council of India failed to exercise authoritative control, allowing universities to use law colleges to generate revenue for unrelated activities. As a result, legal education has become commercialized, with profit over educational quality and improvement. Some universities do not offer the “Legal Method” course as part of their three-year law programme. However, this course is required for all five-year integrated law programmes. The course instruction needs to be improved. Changes in legal research methods and instruction will undoubtedly coincide with the increasing rate of production of legal research materials of various types. Another reason to expect significant changes in the way legal research and writing will be taught is, of course, the development of computerized legal research such as LEXIS and West law.

 

ROLE OF REGULATORY BODIES IN LEGAL EDUCATION

The University Grants Commission (UGC) and the Bar Council of India (BCI) are the two major regulatory bodies in charge of ensuring the quality of legal education in India. However, the quality of legal education in India has long been a source of concern, with major issues including inadequate infrastructure, a lack of qualified faculty, and poor teaching quality. The UGC and BCI have worked to improve the quality of legal education by establishing accreditation and curriculum standards, as well as providing funding to legal education institutions. However, these efforts have not been sufficient to address all issues concerning the quality of legal education in India. In recent years, the legal education system has faced challenges such as a lack of practical training and exposure, inadequate research, and a failure to focus on the needs of the legal profession. Overall, while some high-quality legal education institutions exist in India, many experts and practitioners believe that the overall quality of legal education in India is inadequate. The establishment of the Bar Council of India under the Advocates Act 1981 marked a watershed moment in legal education. According to the act, the bar council plays an important role in legal education. According to Section 7 of the Advocates Act, one of the most important functions of the Indian Bar Council is to promote legal education and establish standards for such education in consultation with Indian universities that provide such education and the state bar councils.

In State of Maharashtra v. Mahubhai Pragmatic Vashi, the Hon’ble Supreme Court stated that

“The need for convincing and well-organized legal education is absolutely essential in light of the new trend in the world order and to meet the ever-changing challenges. Legal education should be adaptable to meet the ever-changing challenges. Legal education should be able to meet society’s ever-increasing demands and be fully prepared to handle the complexities of various situations.

 

THE BAR EXAM

At its meeting on 30 April 2010, the Bar Council of India discussed and approved the All India Bar Examination. The Council decided that candidates could only apply to take the examination after registering as advocates under Section 24 of the Advocates Act, 1961, and that the examination would be required of all law students graduating from the academic year 2009–2010 onward. The AIBE test is irrelevant for people who have no interest in pursuing a career in law as its sole goal was to raise the bar for the legal profession. Therefore, in order to participate in the AIBE, applicants who do not wish to practise law cannot be excused from enrolling before the State Bar Council. After passing the test, the candidate will receive a certificate of practice, allowing them to represent clients in any Indian court. In 40 Indian cities, the test is offered in both national and regional languages. For law graduates, the Bar Council of India administers the All India Bar Examination (AIBE) twice a year as a certification exam. This open-book test, which is administered in 50 locations, evaluates analytical and foundational legal knowledge. A Certificate of Practice is awarded to the successful applicants, enabling them to appear in court anywhere in the country. The three and a half-hour test is multiple-choice in nature and is administered offline. Candidates can retake the test as many as necessary until they pass it, however their temporary membership allows them to attempt to pass the exam for up to two years.

In the case of Bar Council Of India Versus Bonnie Foi Law College & Ors, Supreme Court Constitution Bench upholds the validity of All India Bar Examination and observations emphasize the importance of the Bar Council of India’s (BCI) role in ensuring that only those equipped with legal knowledge pass the All India Bar Examination. They (court) call for the BCI to be more diligent in its duties and to adapt to periodic changes in legal positions. The judgment is to be applied prospectively, not affecting past situations, and does not endorse mandatory pre-enrollment training. Many have criticised the structure and administration of the All India Bar Examination (AIBE). In contrast to previous tests, this one allows candidates to utilise their notes and is open-book. Its main objective is to examine candidates’ ability to locate legal portions rapidly, rather than their ability to think. Due to delays, applicants were permitted to take the exam in provisional form, despite logistical challenges and legal disputes. The exam’s relevance in guaranteeing competent legal practitioners has been undermined by errors in result announcements, which have further complicated the process and resulted in ongoing provisional practice licenses.

 

RECENT CHANGES

Major changes to legal education in India have been suggested by the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Personnel, Public Grievances, Law, and Justice. Principal suggestions include creating the National Council for Legal Education and Research (NCLER) to supervise non-litigation matters, augmenting state financing, and strengthening research capacities through the recruitment of elite experts. The committee is in favour of emphasising practical training through moot courts, merging multidisciplinary disciplines like Tech Law and Sports Law, and integrating a global curriculum to promote international contacts. It is important to prioritise quality assurance procedures to stop the spread of inadequate law schools. The Bar Council of India’s 2023 ruling permitting foreign solicitors and legal firms to engage in non-litigious practice in India is one of the recent developments.

In 2022, the Supreme Court headed by a bench of justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and MM Sundresh pushed for a “complete revamp” of the legal education system in India. The court has expressed concern over the quality of legal education and the influx of individuals obtaining law degrees without attending classes, possibly due to lax entrance examination standards. The Bar Council of India (BCI) has been urged by the court to expedite the process of evolving a fair system for juniors to find placement in chambers, indicating a recognition of the need for reform in the legal education and admission process. The court has also highlighted the importance of not lowering standards for entrance exams and has referenced models such as the “Miller Pyramid Scheme” from the UK as potential alternatives for evaluating prospective advocates.

 

CONCLUSION                                              

It is essential to update the curriculum to reflect modern legal issues and incorporate multidisciplinary courses like commercial arbitration and cyber law. To close the gap between academic knowledge and practical abilities, practical training should be prioritised through clinical programmes and internships. Furthermore, it is advised that the Bar Council of India be relieved of its regulatory responsibilities by creating the National Council for Legal Education and Research (NCLER) to supervise non-litigation facets of legal education. In order to promote these reforms and guarantee that legal education in India satisfies international standards, it is imperative that top academics be hired as faculty members, infrastructure be improved, and state financing be increased.

 

Article written by Gnaneswarran Beemarao

0

Bombay HC: Signing an affidavit by an advocate essentially implies attestation to the accuracy of its contents

blog , ,

Title: Geeta Ramanugrah Shastri v. Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa & Ors.

Decided on: 09.08.2023

+ WRIT PETITION (L) NO. 7383 OF 2023

CORAM: G. S. Patel & Neela Gokhale, JJ.

Facts of the Case:

The petitioner is an advocate with extensive experience practicing in the High Court. The first respondent is the Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa (BCMG), while the second respondent is an individual involved in ongoing litigation that was transferred from the High Court to the City Civil Court. The third respondent, added later, is the Bar Council of India. The case centres around an order issued on September 20, 2022, by an advocate member of the BCMG, referring a disciplinary matter for investigation. The petitioner was accused of professional misconduct by the complainant, who alleged that the petitioner identified certain annexures to an affidavit inaccurately. The petitioner, Ms. Geeta Shastri, was not the advocate-on-record but only identified the deponent of the affidavit.

Issues:

Whether the allegations of professional misconduct against the petitioner hold merit?

Whether signing of an affidavit by the Petitioner implies her attesting to the accuracy of the affidavit’s contents?

Contentions:

Ms. Shastri contended that she had merely identified a deponent’s signature on an affidavit and that this did not translate to her attesting to the accuracy of the affidavit’s contents. She emphasized that she was not the advocate-on-record and therefore should not be held liable for the content of the affidavit. Ms. Shastri argued that the complainant’s interpretation would set a dangerous precedent, potentially leading to a situation where advocates would be reluctant to identify signatures, thus undermining the legal process.

On the other hand, the Respondents argued that Ms. Shastri’s identification of the signature on the affidavit implied her endorsement of the accuracy of the affidavit’s content. Since Ms. Shastri identified the signature, she assumed personal responsibility for any false statements or inaccuracies in the affidavit. This extended to allegations of perjury, forgery, and other misconduct.

Decision:

The court rejected the complainant’s argument and ruled in favor of Ms. Shastri. The court held that an advocate’s identification of a signature on an affidavit does not translate to personal responsibility for the content of the affidavit. The court emphasized that advocates, in this context, are not attesting to the accuracy of the affidavit’s content, and their role is limited to identifying the signature. The court referred to Order 19 Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, which specifies that affidavits should be confined to facts that the deponent can personally prove.

The court also expressed concern about the increasing trend of litigants filing complaints against opposing counsel as a means of intimidation, which undermines the legal profession’s ethical standards and the fair administration of justice. The court highlighted the importance of protecting advocates from such unwarranted threats and pressures.

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

Written by- Aparna Gupta, University Law College & Dept. of Studies in Law

Click to view judgment